I see the word "demographics" used throughout this thread.
Usually, demographic is used to refer to classifying people by age, race, gender, religeon.
There are definitely credit cards that do cater to demographics such as cards targeted at students, or AARP which is targeted at us old folks.
While I agree that there is a lot of information out there regarding the predatory lending practices of banks like First Premier etc, I think it is naive to expect that everyone has the time and resources to sift through all the (often-conflicting) information on the internet when they need credit. Take YouTube, as an example... there are probably YouTubers that shill for predatory lenders and if one just happens to hit one of those videos that is a proponent of First Premier etc then they will feel like they have done their "due diligence". How many times has it been said on the forums that you shouldn't trust what you see on YouTube. Yet, not everyone is going to be comfortable diving into the world of Fico Forums (we are an odd self-selected bunch!). While the forums try to be inviting and inclusive, I also see many posts directed at new users that are less than welcoming because it is assumed they have a basic level of knowledge.
In addition, if one needs a credit card, one may not have the money at hand to put down for security deposits. Secured cards take longer to set up because banks will put 10-day holds on the deposit just to ensure that the payment doesn't bounce. And even a lot of FI that offer secured cards will not approve people with scores below 600. I was denied a secured Discover card several times and it wasn't until my scores were over 600 when I finally was approved for one. My local CU doesn't offer rebuilder cards or secured cards and they tend to be conservative. Even people that you would consider "financially saavy" (like my sisters who have degrees in economics and BILs who have advanced degrees in accounting or law) have never even heard of NFCU -- much less considered themselves eligible. Same with Penfed.
When you are busy trying to keep your head above water because you have kids to take care of, full-time jobs, taking care of a house hold, taking care of aging parents, keeping your aging used car running, AND trying to keep from getting Covid and staying healthy, spending hours pouring over Megathreads here in the forums is luxury many can't afford -- particularly if the brakes on their car need to be replaced so they can continue their DoorDash gig. I even saw someone ask a question about Navy in the credit application forum and they told to read through the VERY LONG Navy megathread. It's one thing to tell people to educate themselves... it is another thing to expect them to devote several hours over the course of several days just to find that the megathread didn't answer their specific question.
Let's take kids building credit as an example. Kids are told that they need credit cards (or maybe they've decided that they want one). They apply for one of the big-boy banks because that's what they see on TV and are denied because they don't have a credit score. At this point they're thinking "how do I get a credit score if you won't give me a credit card"... so then they start going on an app spree starting with the cards that constantly advertise on TV, they incur hard pull after hard pull not realizing that's a bad thing. That starts the "death spiral" until they finally get to First Premier (who also advertises aggressively on the internet) who does give them a chance. So they get a First Premier card and start using it because they don't realize that utilization is a major hit as well. They're students who have to buy college books (often 300 to 500 per semester) and they can't afford to PIF and pay the minimums. The death spiral continues so that when they FINALLY get their first credit score, it is in the 500s. They are starting out in sub-prime territory.
This isn't a far-fetched scenario. My son is getting his PhD in Physics... he's probably the smartest person I know... but financial stuff is greek to him (well, actually worse because he actually knows greek AND Latin!). He's intimidated by it. He doesn't have the time or inclination to spend hours here reading how to "do it right". *IF* it wasn't for the fact that I have been spending the equivalent of a part-time job reading these boards, he could have easily found himself down that rabbit hole. His dad (who is a physician and again, literally Mensa material) doesn't even understand FICO basics -- and in fact, would counsel my son that credit is cancer and to be avoided at all costs... until my son needs to rent an apartment but can't because he doesn't have a credit score... or he needs to get auto insurance and winds up paying through the nose because again, no credit score.
We are a very SMALL self-selected community that has made credit our avocation (or, for some, there vocation) either out of necessity (because we realized we couldn't survive without a decent credit score) or desire (because we enjoy the thrill of the hunt!). To expect that the other 99 percent of the universe has the time and energy to do what we do here is unrealistic.
Sorry for the very long post.
As I said in my OP, I was primarily interested in the application of "sub-prime" to human beings. As I said in another thread... to refer to us as sub-prime consumers makes it seem that we are less worthy of respect and of less worth as a human being (and I'm not talking about financial worth). Those of us who are not blessed with 750+ fico scores still are inherently good people who work hard, raise our families, need to take care of our homes just like everyone else. To me, the phrase: "sub-prime consumer" seems like a label that is a form of credit shaming.
However, since many people here have referred to people as "sub-prime consumers" it would appear that I am the only one that feels this way.
@Remedios wrote:*sub-prime* isnt a measure of someone's character, it's used to describe risk assessment associated with the loan lender issues.
In a nutshell, it's a measure on how far someone is from being approved at prime rates and terms.
*sub* might sound negative, but the alternatives are "under-prime", "below-prime", "not ideal".
No matter which adjective is used, it's going to sound negative.
I would agree with this if there hadn't been a statement posted that there are no sub-prime banks... only sub-prime consumers. So if we are unwilling to attach a lable of "sub-prime" to a financial institution, then aren't actual people deserving of the same consideration?
In terms of alternative labels... "credit-challenged"? "Underbanked" is a perfectly appropriate term but is generally thought of in the context of deposit accounts. "Rebuilding" or "Building" are also very reasonable terms. As you pointed out later in your post (sorry, I got edit happy), building credit is like crawling out of a hole... and maybe if someone is standing in a hole, it may be accurate to refer to them as "sub-terranians", that has a conotation that goes far beyond simply where they are standing relative to their proximity to ground level. Even referring to people who live in basement apartments as "basement dwellers" is considered an insult. The infamous quote about hackers being a "400 pound guy living in his mom's basement"... doesn't exactly conjure up positive feelings about that person's worth as a human being... nor was it intended to... it was intended (and succeeded) at being a pejoritive phrase.
@designated_knitter, there are no Kudos in this SmorgasBoard arena, so, in lieu of a "Thumbs up", how about, "Well said!". 
Psssshaw! Twern't nuthin!
I just hope that no one was attempting to operate heavy machinery while reading my posts... extreme drowsiness most certainly would have occured 
@designated_knitter wrote:
Psssshaw! Twern't nuthin!
I just hope that no one was attempting to operate heavy machinery while reading my posts... extreme drowsiness most certainly would have occured
LOL, and I thought I was drowsy because I just finished a 6.5 mile trail run on a very humid 90° day. 
You're looking too deep into it and taking offense to something that wasn't intended to offend anyone. It's just a term. Sub-prime means below prime. Nothing more. You could replace the term to one that isn't deemed offensive today, but it may be tomorrow. Personally, I feel terms like "underbanked" and "credit-challenged" are more hurtful than a prefix denoting a range on a scale.
As for demographics, it's just the breaking up of population based on a set criteria whether it's race, age, gender, whatever. In the case of finance it's scores, income, AAoA, etc. Another situation where perception changes it's meaning to each person.
In regards to the Navy thread, why do you think we reboot it? You're not the only person to have noticed those types of comments. I've been pushing for the reboot for months based on those same comments and situations. It's why the first post is being kept up to date with the most common, and data backed info; to keep people from digging through 1000 pages to get an answer. It's also why we've attempted to keep it as clutter-free as possible.
@Brian_Earl_Spilner wrote:You're looking too deep into it and taking offense to something that wasn't intended to offend anyone. It's just a term. Sub-prime means below prime. Nothing more. You could replace the term to one that isn't deemed offensive today, but it may be tomorrow. Personally, I feel terms like "underbanked" and "credit-challenged" are more hurtful than a prefix denoting a range on a scale.
As for demographics, it's just the breaking up of population based on a set criteria whether it's race, age, gender, whatever. In the case of finance it's scores, income, AAoA, etc. Another situation where perception changes it's meaning to each person.
In regards to the Navy thread, why do you think we reboot it? You're not the only person to have noticed those types of comments. I've been pushing for the reboot for months based on those same comments and situations. It's why the first post is being kept up to date with the most common, and data backed info; to keep people from digging through 1000 pages to get an answer. It's also why we've attempted to keep it as clutter-free as possible.
I think you're getting to defensive about my comment with regards to the navy thread.
(That last statement was for illustrative purposes only. When it comes to communication, I don't think it is wise to be the arbiter of whether someone should take offense or not. I certainly did not mean to offense when I made the comment about being redirected to the Navy mega thread but as the "keeper of the thread " I can understand where you might feel defensive.)
I hope I'm not violating TOS by disagreeing or questioning with several members on this thread. Again, I'm trying to have a discussion here. I'm explaining how I feel. I own these feelings however to tell someone they shouldn't feel a certain way is, in my humble opinion, disrespectful.
As I said, if it is wrong to attach a label to a business based on their business model because it may reflect poorly on that business, then customers deserve the sam(if not more) consideration. I realize that courts have ruled that businesses are people too... but frankly, I doubt the CEO of First Premier isn't going to be all offended.... but I could be wrong. If he is, I sincerely apologize as that was not my intention.
